This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
lANSBEE AND MCLEOD,
AITORNEYS AT LAW
536 GRANITE STRE!!,", 31l1l FLooR EAST BRAINTREE, MASSACHUSETIS 02184
TELEPHONE (781) 848-1500 FACSIMILE (781) 848-2220
January 16, 2009 Robert S. Troy, Esq. 90 Old Kings Highway Sandwich, MA 02563 Re: Johnson Golf Management v. Town of Duxbury
Dear Bob: I had an opportunity to meet with Mr. MacDonald and his staff this morning and they were very hospitable and accommodating. Mr. MacDonald provided me with a copy of his decision regarding North Hill Country Club Golf Course and he allowed me to review the proposals and evaluations. When I left Duxbury, Mr. MacDonald was busy in a meeting, so I left him a handwritten note with a few of our concerns. I would like to articulate them in a slightly more formal manner to you in the hopes of resolving our differences. . In the evaluations and the decision of Mr. MacDonald it is apparent that the Duxbury officials were misled and deceived by the proposal submitted by CALM Golf, Inc. Although I do not have a copy of CALM Golf's proposal, I did have an opportunity to review it. CALM Golf stated that it operated the Rockland Golf Course. That is not true. CALM Golf has ~ operated the Rockland Golf Course. The Rockland Golf Course is owned by the Trust For Public Land, 33 Union Street, Boston, MA 02108. TPL leases 9 holes of the 18 hole par 3 Golf Course to C.P. &.L.~Inc., acorporation in which Mr. Charles Lanzetta is an officer. C.P.&.L., Inc. is currently in bankruptcy, having filed its second voluntary petition on March 28, 2008 in the United States Bankruptcy Court, District of Massachusetts - Eastern Division.
In addition to the fact that CALM Golf is not presently managing any golf courses, CALM Golf
provided Duxbury with unaudited financial statements, which demonstrate that CALM Golfhas not had any income in the past three years. Furthermore, the balance sheets provided by CALM Golf show that and CALM Golf has no assets.
Mr. Lanzetta knowingly and wilfully lied to the Town of Duxbury about the experience of CALM Golf. He did so with the full knowledge that a municipality would not look favorably upon a proposal from a company in bankruptcy. In fact the proposed contract attached to Duxbury's RFP states that "It shall be a default under this Agreement if Manager: a) Shall be declared bankrupt or insolvent according to the law, or if any assignment shall be made for the benefit of creditors." 1
I assure you that Mr. Lanzetta's deception was not a matter of forgetfulness misunderstanding on his part. It was a deliberate act to deceive the Town of Duxbury. or some
I respectfully suggest that we sit down and resolve this matter by having the Town of Duxbury rescind the award to CALM Golf, Inc. and proceed with an award to Johnson Golf Management, Inc. Kindly let me know if your client is interested in pursuing this option.
Thank you for your attention.
Very truly yours,
Stephen R. Follansbee
Article 12 A Default by Bankruptcy, page 19 RFP
FOLLANSBEE AND l\1cLEOD, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT L"W
RICHARD M. McLEOD
April 3, 2009 Robert Troy, Esq. 90 Route 6A Sandwich, MA 02563
Johnson Golfv. Duxbury Middlesex Superior Court
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLKMENT PROPOSAL
Dear Bob: In the event that the Town of Duxbury is of a mind to move forward and resolve the outstanding litigation, Johnson Golf stands ready to enter into negotiation for a five year contract consistent with the RFP issued in the fall of2008 and the proposal submitted by Johnson Golf Management in response thereto. Some slight modifications would be required due to the intervening actions taken by the respective parties. If this notion has any appeal to you and your client please let me know, Thank you for your attention
Very truly yours,
Stephen R. Follansbee SRF/nb Douglas Johnson cc
April 13, 2009
Board of Selectman TO\\'Ilof Duxbury 878 Tremont St. Duxbury, Ma. Re: North Hill Country Club Dear Board Members: After listening to the hearing on the liquor license for North Hill, I feel I should contact you directly, as I am equally frustrated and uncomfortable with what has transpired at North Hill. I will be as factual and brief as possible. Johnson Golf Management, Inc. has been in the golf management business for twenty two years. In those twenty two years we have probably submitted bids or proposals on more that one hundred occasions. In this time period we have been in litigation four or five times, regarding issues of compliance with the Massachusetts bidding statutes. Our experience is that the Courts will uphold the bidding statutes and full compliance with the bidding statuettes is the only way to go. I certainly don't take pleasure in litigation, but as golf is our business and livelihood, I will attempt to make sure that the bidding process complies with the law and that everyone plays by the same rules. As you know, North Hill went out to bid by RFP in October 2008. There were five bidders, of which only one was a qualified golf management company, namely Johnson Golf. The other bidders were not qualified. I contacted the town repeatedly after a couple of weeks to ask what the hold up was in awarding the bid. After six weeks, Mr. MacDonald issued a letter saying all bids were thrown out and that the rejection of the proposals was in the best interest of the town. He gave no specific reason as to why, which we believed was required by law. We repeatedly asked the town for copies evaluations and nronosats. which had become public The town' s response to provide attorney this under the rreeaom of
In court in late December, your town counsel, Mr. Troy stated that the reason for are-bid was because the evaluations were not done properly. He went on to tell the court that he decided that all evaluations and proposals would be kept by him until after the "re-bid." In court my attorney asked if the town had the proposals in their possession and if there was a mistake by the evaluation team, why must you re-bid? Either have the evaluators do it correctly or bring in new evaluators to do it right. What was the need for new proposals? 'What we have learned since the end of December casts some light on what was being done. In bid number one, CALM Golf bid $300,000.00 plus 5% of any gross over $500,000.00. This was a violation of the town's RFP as the town asked for a "flat rate." By the way, the 5% would have amounted to an average ofless than $5,000.00 per year based on the figures in the RFP for the last ten years. Johnson Golf Management bid $420,000 in both RFP #1 and #2, as there were no substantive changes in the RFP. CALM Golf in RFP #2 raised its bid by $212,500.00 to $512,500.00 This amounted to an increase of over 70% coming during a period of the worst economic conditions in the history of our country. Common sense would cause anyone examining the facts to question what was CALM's motive for such an increase. Is it possible that a legitimate responsible, professional company could bid like this? That is not very likely. In court CALM's attorney was asked why this bid changed. The attorney answered that "they" gave him input. Judge Smith said it right in his decision that he found it "incredible" that anyone could rank CALM Golf highly advantageous. I have seen newspaper accounts that the course will go out for bid again this year for the 2010 golf season. My previous experiences tell me that this case will not go to trial for a minimum of two to three years and we will be operating it as Judge Smith says "until further order of the court or until a settlement is reached." According to my attorneys I believe that we plan to deposition between fifteen and twenty witnesses, so it would be safe to say that at a minimum there will probably about seventy five to one hundred hours of depositions. As a business man I ask my attorney to outline the cost for me and I would think you would do the same. I am very confident that, if the case proceeds to a conclusion, we will prevail in this case and we would be seeking compensation for our and costs. Without zetnna the best interest
",,,,,,,,,U,,, of the factual allegations in our case, I believe it would be
to meet and potentially
... ..ha" "
try to settle
before it becomes
I sent to
to which I have
I would be happy to meet with you, with or without lawyers, to begin a dialog which will hopefully resolve our differences. I hope to hear form you. Thank you for your attention and consideration.
Douglas W. Johnson Johnson Golf Management, Inc.
FOLLANSBEE AND McLEOD,
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
536 GRANITE STREET, 3RD FLOOR EAST BRAINTREE, MASSACHUSETTS 02184
RICHARD M. McLEOD
781- 848-1500 781- 848-2220
July 28, 2009 Robert Troy, Esq. 90 Route 6A Sandwich, MA 02563 Re: Johnson Golf - North Hill Country Club, Town of Duxbury
Dear Bob: As we stated in our meeting with you and Gordon Cushing last week, we believe that Johnson Golf is in compliance with the terms of the contract and in compliance with the orders entered by the Middlesex Superior Court. In February 2009, Johnson Golf sent out the permit holder renewals based upon advice from the Recreation Department to use the rates in the RFP. Shortly thereafter there was discussion between Jason Laramee of Johnson Golf and Gordon Cushing as to what the rates would have been pursuant to the prior contract. Since that time there has been no input from the Town of Duxbury until we discussed it at your office last week. Johnson Golf did not raise the rates for any Greens Fees or Cart Rates from the levels that they were at in 2008. The rates as provided by the Recreation Department were slightly lower on average than the rates that Johnson Golf would be entitled to under the former contract. As I have written to you previously, in the event that the Town of Duxbury is of a mind to move forward and resolve the outstanding litigation, Johnson Golf stands ready to enter into negotiation for a five year contract consistent with the RFP issued the 2008 and the proposal submitted by Johnson Golf Management response thereto. Some slight modifications would be required due to the intervening actions the respective parties. you know, the decision of Mr. Richard MacDonald to was predicated on the demonstrably false a. CALM Golf is gmrmttt managing b. CALM ~r!lJ~'~f..!1}g!:m8l~ ~,,'uV~""UJ c. d. a contract to CALM Golf, Inc.
The materials previously provided to Duxbury together with the pleadings on file in the case demonstrate that CALM Golf's proposal in the category of Financial Information could not possibly have been considered as Highly Advantageous since it did not provide the required audited financial statements. Additionally, CAUv1 Golf only provided two years worth of financial statements together with one corporate tax return showing zero income. In its proposal CALM Golf identified only two "contracts" awarded to CALM Golf throughout its six years in existence. One was a four month contract at Strawberry Valley, Abington in 2003 and the other was a contract in 2008 having to do with the "Pro Shop" at the Rockland Golf Course, which is essentially a contract between Charles Lanzetta and himself. The financial statements submitted by CALM Golf in its proposal show that CALM Golf did not have any income in the years 2005,2006 and 2007. These were the only years for which CALM Golf provided financial data. The financial statements submitted by CALM Golfin its proposal show that CALM Golf had total assets of$4,411.92 in 2005; total assets of $1,336.92 in 2006; and total assets of$169.00 as of December 31, 2007. The financial statements submitted by CALM Golf are not audited and thus the proposal of CALM Golf could never have achieved the rating of "Highly Advantageous" in the category of Financial Information. CALM Golf was not operating any golf course as of the date of its proposal and with the exception ofa four month period in 2003, CALM Golf has never operated and maintained any golf course. The financial information provided by CALM Golf in its proposal demonstrate that CALM Golf had no income for the previous three years and minimal assets of$169.00 as of the end of2007. Continued litigation and escalating costs on both sides will not benefit either the Town of Duxbury or Johnson Golf. If this notion has any appeal to you and your client please let me know. Thank you for your attention Very truly yours,
Stephen R. Follansbee SRF/nb cc Douglas W. Johnson
JOHNSON GOLF MANAGEMENT, INC.
P.O. Box 126
Weston, MA 02493
Board of Selectman Town of Duxbury Town Hall 878 Tremont St. Duxbury, MA 02332 Re: North Hill Country Club - Management Contract Dear Board Members: As you know as part of our ongoing litigation with the Town of Duxbury we have been conducting discovery. Thus far we have finished one deposition, Mr. Charles Lanzetta of CALM Golf. We have suspended the depositions of both Mr. MacDonald, your town manager and Mr. Madden your town finance director. Our attorney took the depositions of Mr. Lanzetta, Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Madden. I am enclosing copies of their testimony (evidently Attorney Troy did not order copies). I am of the belief that Mr. MacDonald was being intentionally evasive throughout his testimony. He couldn't even remember what year he graduated from college. His answer was "1991 or 1992". He was asked as Chief Procurement Officer who drafted the RFP for North Hill, Answer, don't recall". When asked what financial information he relied on as part of his decision he answered "I don't . When asked if it was the $169.00 in assets that CALM Golf reported, he answered "I don't recall". "I don't recall" was an answer he used at least times. Mr. Madden was not much better. that reasonable people arriving at a mutually
In our bid we offered $420,000 for five years an average of $84,000 per year. As I told Mr. Troy, the court has appointed us to operate North Hill until either a settlement of the case or a court decision. We are operating under the old RFP, not the new one. In the first RFP in October of 2008, we bid some $100,000.00 more than CALM Golf Interestingly, Mr. Lanzetta, under oath, said he changed his bid from $280,000.00 on the first RFP in October to the town, to $512,500.00 on the second RFP on advice of his Attorney, Mr. John Geary. Lanzetta went on to state Mr. Geary was not representing him in the first RFP but was on the second. As you may know, Mr. Geary is a Duxbury resident and former member of the North Hill Advisory Committee. CALM Golf raised their bid by a factor in excess of 83% in the worst economic times in the history of this country, all on the advice of Mr. John Geary. Mr. Lanzetta's deposition also verified that every point made in Mr. MacDonald's award letter regarding CALM Golf was untrue. I have attached for your consideration Mr. MacDonald's award letter and Exhibit No. 11 from the Lanzetta Deposition. Lanzetta confirms under oath that everything in the MacDonald decision was untrue. I understand that you, the Board of Selectman have two attorneys on your committee. As attorneys I am confident you will see where this is going to go if it is ever presented in Court. I know other Towns have pursued the people who get involved in rigging bids to get damages from them. I think part of the bidding laws in Chapter 30B allows for that. No one should be allowed to just make something up to obtain the contract. That goes for the bidders and the people who evaluate the bids. I am willing to settle, however, please remember that some individuals in your town have tried to cheat me and my company on an RFP which we won fair and square. You are in a better position than I am to get to the bottom of this mess. If it goes to Court it will all come out. I would certainly prefer to work this out but if you want to litigate it, I'll have no alternative but to do so.
1 have enclosed a letter I sent to your Board last April. In it I address the statement from the Duxbury Clipper that Mr. Troy states the course would be back out for bid for 2010. The ongoing litigation benefits no one. Despite some news accounts to the contrary, I take no pleasure in litigation. I simply want to do our job, maintain the course and provide jobs for our staff people.
If you are interested me know. Respectfully, in meeting of the deposition exhibits let
A. B. C. D. E. F. G.
MacDonald Award and Exhibit 11 from Lanzetta Lanzetta Deposition Vol. I Lanzetta Deposition Vol. II MacDonald Deposition Madden Deposition Letter to Selectmen Spring 2009 Letters to Troy to Settle - 2009
MacDonald Decision January 15, 2009 (Reasons for award to CALM) CALM operating Rockland Golf Course CALM in business since 1978 CALM has all equipment CALM Golf is currentlv managing a golf course
Lanzetta Testimony November 4, 2009
CALM never operated Rockland CALM was established in May 2003 CALM owned no equipment CALM not managing any course and in its entire corporate history CALM managed only one course for four months in 2003 CALM never ran Rockland
CALM's experience at Rockland confirms its ability to run North HilI CALM has sufficient financial information to be considered the most advantageous proposer for the Town
CALM had total assets of $169.00 and no income at all. CALM provided no evidence to the TO\VTI it ever had any income or that assets CALM had total assets of $169.00 and no income at all CALM provided no evidence to the Town that it ever had any income or assets. Despite stating in its proposal that it had "many previous and present contracts, ,,1 Lanzetta admitted that in its history CALM had only one contract which from May 2003 to August 2003.
Financial data provided must give the To\VTI onfidence that the Proposer c could administer a significant business such as North Hill
In CALM at 2 as "CALM Golf, Inc. Has entered into and been awarded many previous and present contracts throughout its six years in existence."
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.